Re: Backing out timedlock? (Was [POLL] Re: Et resurrexit tertia die.)

Let us let the VOTE and POLL threads run out. If we see a -1 on the change and agreement that we don't ship experimental code from the POLL, I will back out your disabled-default commit, fork 1.7.x to preserve all progress, and then unwind the appropriate commits to be back at 1.5 on the 1.6.x

Re: Backing out timedlock? (Was [POLL] Re: Et resurrexit tertia die.)

On Fri, 19 May 2017 13:28:02 -0500 William A Rowe Jr wrote: > No, it's dirt simple stupid to svn merge to revert each relevant Fair point. Let's do it, then make a 1.6.1 to twin with the existing APU tarball as RC. -- Nick Kew